Some people don't play demos or read game reviews for video games they're interested in.  Many readers across many websites complain that reviews are often biased, waltzing about on a high horse while proudly proclaiming, "This is why I never listen to reviews."  Yet when a writer tries to leave out his (or her) opinion, readers will sometimes exhibit annoyance and ask, "So should I get it or not?"

And then there's the demos we look forward to.  I've always been under the impression demos are primarly used to promote games that, for whatever reason, need the exposure.  New IPs or smaller franchises are good candidates, while sure-hits like Gears of War 2 can take a pass.  Demos shouldn't give away too much about the game, of course, but then companies run the risk of sending distorted messages.  A recent example of false first impressions is EA DICE's Mirror's Edge.

The Mirror's Edge demo became available in September 2008, and the game had already accumulated a fair amount of hype.  Here we had a title so full of potential, a game that was about freedom of movement and the beauty of free space rather than unnecessary violence or mindless gore.  Everything about the game screamed "innovation," from gameplay to character design, and we were terribly excited.  The short demo only fed our insatiable desire to see the final product and possess it in our hands.  Come November, reviewers were posting articles conveying disappointment, that exciting potential left untapped.  With an overall positive score across various video game magazines and websites, gamers noticed the deflated tone in these game reviews, and they exhibited both surprise and indignance -- well, the fans were pretty indignant about it.  They had played the same demo as all the reviewers, after all, and how could something so incredible produce such disheartening feedback?  Simply put, the demo failed to accurately convey the game, and we had no way of seeing the whole picture with just that snippet of information.  Certainly, a game demo shouldn't be burdened with such a task, which begs the question, "What are we looking for in a demo?"

On paper, the Mirror's Edge demo gave us everything we could want from a preview -- a tutorial, gameplay mechanics, stunning visuals, and just a hint of plot.  It sold Mirror's Edge quite well, seducing all of us within minutes.  So EA DICE technically did their job, right?  Maybe it's the reviewers, expecting too much out of just that small segment of play.  I'd say we were simply expecting all the wrong things.  For games like Metal Gears Solid or Gears of War, you fire up the console knowing what you're getting into.  New IPs usually have a shroud of mystery because they're descending into the market without much background, but in this case, the Mirror's Edge demo was exacerbating misinformation.  Many gamers thought it was just a game about delivering illegal parcels; others knew there would be confrontations, but most had no idea that nearly the entire game would involve running away from authorities unarmed.  Hell, the setting turned out to be a lot less free than originally thought.

Or is it just bad PR?

The PlayStation Home open demo is still ongoing, and users have already made a hobby of bashing the service.  PlayStation 3 owners painted their own picture of what Home would be like, but when Sony drew their own picture and showed us what Home actually is (at least at this current stage), the difference between hyped-up expectations and actuality earned a whole lot of criticism.

Reviews also provide decent insight into games you happen to be on the fence about.  Unless you have no qualms about pirating every single title you want to try, checking reviews can also help save time and money, yet we've seen that if gamers have already formed their own opinion toward a certain title, a negative or lukewarm review is not going to change his mind.  Like with game demos, reviews generally keep away from spoilers.  As reviewers, we comment on gameplay, comparisons against previous similar titles, and quality as we perceive it.  We may not be able to give away every detail of a game's story, but we can tell readers how we feel about it.  But should we be telling readers outright which games to buy and which they should pass on?

And so, there are statements like, "This game wasn't my cup of tea, but if you liked the previous Dynasty Warriors, you'll probably enjoy this one too." 

Here's a question for you: what does the average gamer look for in a demo or review?  Demos can offer up wrong impressions, but that can depend solely on the player's perspective.  So are you better off jumping into a game without an inkling of what to expect, or is a safety net more preferrable?  While demos and reviews are useful consumer tools, a preconception might ultimately damage how we approach a certain game.  And if demos are supposed to convince you a game is worth buying, what's up with Sony bundling the Killzone 2 demo with the pre-order?

The world may never know.